If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

trying out new old lenses (Don's Tamron + 100-200)

#1 - Don's Tamron 70-300 LD 1:2 'macro' zoom. Geez Don, did you ever give it a try? All wrapped up in its original plastic, boxed with papers intact.. other than sporting a UV filter and Alpha lens-cap it might never have left the box. The light was fading as I gave it a whirl, so just a couple testers for now - handheld at iso1600 (flower) / iso400 (fence). Both RAW images picasafied during upload, no other PP.

#2 - a Minolta 100-200 fresh from auction. This is a lens has lived a full life , with some grit in the zoom ring and a fine scuff on the front element. Despite this, and for the price, it seems to be holding up well. Perhaps not well enough to dethrone my 70-210/3.5-4.5, but we'll see about that. This also RAW+picasa, nothing else.

Never look at a piece of glass with your mouth ... or something like that

Originally Posted by jimr-pdx

#1 - Don's Tamron 70-300 LD 1:2 'macro' zoom. Geez Don, did you ever give it a try? All wrapped up in its original plastic, boxed with papers intact.. other than sporting a UV filter and Alpha lens-cap it might never have left the box.

Jim,

I never said it was a bad lens. In fact, my ol' buddy 'Rooz' was shooting off his mouth that I had too many lenses in my inventory, so I happily selected it as the "obvious" candidate for ... someone else to make use of, since it rarely ever saw the light of day.

Call it my version of "recycling" if you want. It truly is in like new condition, like most of my other glass items. I treat them like they were ... GLASS! Who knew? Most of my lenses all have their original containers and paperwork. The cameras, too.

I am glad it arrived to you safely and in good working order. Again, you did well in your contest participation and thankfully ("lurkers", take heed), sometimes participation pays off. I honestly do not know how I could make a better point of that.

Give the lens a good work-out and go get them there "eagles" you stated that you needed that "extra range" to snap on. Personally, even with the 200-500mm, my eagle-shots have been a challenge because of location, location ... location.

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

And I never said you said it was bad.. I just wonder if you used it at all, it's so fresh but I know you did, and with your big tele-zooms you definitely moved on. We'll just see what critters pop into my viewfinder; I had a hummer in my sights today with the 100-200, turned out I was in M mode so they're overexposed we'll see if the RAW images kept enough detail for me to pull back. Ah, why wasn't I shooting M with a faster shutter??

I am hardly one to tell people how to shoot. I developed my own preferences from doing it with a light meter in one hand and a 35mm-film SLR in the other. I notice too many retakes when I let the camera run its own course ... but there is no harm in finding out what solution it selects in the three other modes (P, A, S). Work that rig ... the price of "film" is right, that's for sure.

Also, if you bracket ... you can get a margin of safety recovery there, too.

Just a thought ... and just shoot straight! LOL

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi

I was on M for a family dinner in a dim Mexican cantina. One margararita too many I guess, forgot to reset - the price one pays for a great meal with a fun family! Places like that are ideal for a 17-xx lens, that's for sure - my 50 couldn't handle the wide view.

Going wide, step aside!

Well, considering a 50mm on a APS-C effectively becomes a 75mm (short-telephoto class) ... you have a point. Even a 28mm is effectively 44mm (normal class). A decent bag of glass becomes rather dubious, because you just cannot back up.

The 17-xx lens is a good interior lens, but I have to admit, if you really do not want to move, the new SIGMA AF 10-20mm f/3.5 DC EX is effectively 15-30mm ... and that is a real "group catcher."

As a head-on, portrait lens, though ... it can make everyone look like they ate really well, for quite a while. Attachment 49552

Don Schap - BFA, Digital Photography A Photographer Is ForeverLook, I did not create the optical laws of the Universe ... I simply learned to deal with them.
Remember: It is usually the GLASS, not the camera (except for moving to Full Frame), that gives you the most improvement in your photography.flickr® & Sdi